Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com
Subject: ARNIE, YOU ARE AMONG
Message-ID: <9601082250.0W38803@support.com>
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35
Distribution: world
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 96 22:50:33 -0800
Lines: 94
richieb@teleport.com (RichieB)
The Me:
> These slime that are operating from OSA at the behest of
> poodleboy are not representative of the individual cult
> member (who is only cognative dissonance-impaired). The
> operatives you see on ars are career a-holes. They go where
> the average scieno in the org would not dare: into our
> homes and places of employment, in order to shut us up.
>
> They are not victims. They are victimizers. When they
> have a doubt about their orders and think "Wait a minute!",
> *then* they'll be victims.
>
>Your points are well taken.
>
>I wasn't thinking of OSA specifically, though they are certainly
>who we're dealing with here. I have a feeling that the anger
>of critics isn't always just directed towards OSA. I find myself
>thinking negatively about even the local staff when I walk by
>the Celebrity Centre, occasionally (I like to keep up to date
>on their nifty window displays). I have a feeling I'm not the only
>one.
I'm pissed at the brain-dead zombie members for not bothering
to get their cult's dirty little act cleaned up after all
these years. And I'm pissed at the lead-sheep like Revolta,
Crews and Ally for not bothering to take a role in
straightening out the lawn-ornament sized, little bitty
dictator, poodleboy.
>Do people tend to blame Scientologists (and other cult members)
>for their predicament?
While you cannot release them toadly from responsibility, it
should be known that most scienos are no more guilty than the
guy that gets sold any fraudulent investment, and then has to
swear by it.
>We seem to get those "Who would be
>stupid enough to fall for this shit?" posts here often enough.
There is a degree of accuracy if the question is put "Who
would be gullible, naive or idealistic enough to believe this
shit?"
>I'm glad you mentioned OSA, though. It raises some more
>questions for me.
>
>You say that OSA are "career a-holes," and I won't argue with
>that characterization, by any means. Are the people who end
>up in OSA that way already?
As Lord Buckley would say "They've been trained
scientifically to be bad dudes." But I wouldn't have done
this kind of dirty work for the cult even at my most
brainwashed. People knew that and never even tried to get me
to.
I did, however, know dirty tricks were going on "over there"
and didn't feel I had the power or authority to stop them.
When I took a stand it was with regard to mistreatment of
staff and the vicious way management treated staff and
mission holders. The greed and power-tripping.
>How are people recruited into OSA?
By being in the right position to infiltrate, or by working
up the ranks as ethics officer, MAA types.
>Does OSA actively seek out people that they think have a thick
>enough skin to carry out Black PR, Fair Gaming, etc.?
Yes, and who have passed the requsisite sec checks and
loyalty tests.
>What kind of "training" do they receive and what effects does it
>have?
They are trained to lie and infiltrate. How not to answer
and divert attention to the person raising the question about
the cult. They are drilled on these skills until proficient.
>I'd be real interested in hearing about this.
Neal Hamel could tell you more. So could Fishman. Ask more
specific questions of me if you want elaboration.
Rev. Dennis L Erlich * * the inFormer * *